A Christological Case for Conditionalism, Using the Epistle to the Hebrews

   The epistle to the Hebrews is relentlessly Christological, interpreting Israel’s Scriptures, covenants, and worship in light of the Son’s person and work. This Christ-centered hermeneutic is not merely doxological; it also governs Hebrews’ warnings, where judgement is repeatedly described with the language of death, destruction, and consuming fire. This article offers a Christological exegesis of Hebrews’ judgement language and engages select moments in the history of interpretation to show how the epistle’s vocabulary all but demands a conclusion of death being the final fate of the wicked. The central claim is that by using Christ as the centerpiece of the epistle, Hebrews is not only difficult to reconcile with eternal conscious torment, but coherently presents a model of final punishment consistent with conditional immortality.

Death as the Penalty Revealed in the Son

“But we do see Jesus, who for a little while was made lower than the angels, now crowned with glory and honour because of the suffering of death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone … Since, therefore, the children share flesh and blood, he himself likewise shared the same things, so that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by the fear of death.” Hebrews 2:9, 14-15 NRSV^[1]

   The first instance of Christological exegesis we will examine is centered on the death of Christ, and how it expands our knowledge of final punishment. The punishment of the Son of God is made explicit in the text: He suffered death. If Christ is the looking glass through which we understand scripture, his death must be a major part of that understanding. Focusing on him taking our place at the cross, we see what otherwise awaited us were he to not take it for us. Defenders of the traditionalist perspective will often attempt to redefine “death” in a way that appeases both the work of Christ on the cross, and what the unrighteous will experience in hell. The larger context of the book of Hebrews seems to suggest no such division. In the place of humankind, it was the Son of God who tasted death, which was literally being deprived of his life, or in other words, he suffered the end result of sin, which as stated by the apostle Paul, “...is death” (Rom. 6:23, emphasis mine). Not only was the atoning work of Christ to suffer the end result of sin for us, but it was, according to the author, to destroy Satan’s power over death and set us free from fear of such a thing happening to us. Understanding this part of the atoning work of Christ is crucial for how we understand its relation to final judgement. The death and resurrection of Christ, in some way, assured that Satan’s power over death would be abolished. We must attend carefully to the verb used in the Greek text to see what kind of “destruction” is in view. Hebrews 2:14 uses the verb καταργέω to describe the effect of Christ’s death on “the one who has the power of death.” BDAG notes that καταργέω can denote bringing something to an end; to “abolish,” “wipe out,” or “set aside.”^[2] Significantly, it cites Hebrews 2:14 alongside texts where the same verb is used for the abolition of death itself (e.g., 1 Cor 15:26; 2 Tim 1:10). In context, then, the author’s claim is not merely that the devil is opposed, but that his death-dealing dominion is nullified, situating the passage within a semantic field of ending/abolition rather than the infliction of ongoing torment.

   This passage strongly presents a final conclusion of that power rather than an ongoing preservation of it, so much so that the 19th century Baptist minister, and close associate of D.L. Moody, traditionalist F.B. Meyer nevertheless uses language in his work The Way Into the Holiest: Expositions on the Epistle to the Hebrews that is uncomfortable and requires qualification not otherwise necessary in a model of final punishment that ends in destruction. Expounding upon the very passage we are looking at now, he says, “But since Jesus died, the devil and his power are destroyed.”^[3] As straightforward as this claim is, it cannot be left to stand as-is, lest it cede Hebrews to annihilationism, so he appends the logic in the very next sentence, “Brought to naught, not made extinct.”^[4] This creates interpretive tension for the believer in eternal torment. As we have already seen, the semantic field of καταργέω in verse 14 is most naturally read as a wiping out, whether it be applied to Satan himself, or his power over death. Continuing in his description of the effects of the atonement, the author states that the death of Christ set people free from fear of death. The author’s logic presupposes that death is not a minor transition but the decisive calamity from which Christ rescues his people. Given that believers still undergo biological death, we cannot reduce the victory of Christ to simply guaranteeing that we will physically live forever in this current state. Rather, it points us towards a larger victory, triumph over death as the final loss of life. This is the consistent theme both in this passage and the epistle as a whole, where vocabulary in reference to judgement is repeatedly consumptive, using terms such as “fire”, “death”, or “burned over.”

Final Judgement of Those Who Fall Away

“For it is impossible to restore again to repentance those who have once been enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and have shared in the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come, and then have fallen away, since on their own they are crucifying again the Son of God and are holding him up to contempt. Ground that drinks up the rain falling on it repeatedly, and that produces a crop useful to those for whom it is cultivated, receives a blessing from God. But if it produces thorns and thistles, it is worthless and on the verge of being cursed; its end is to be burned over.” Hebrews 6:4-8

   Speaking on the fate of those who turn to apostasy, the author makes it clear that they are once again putting Christ on the cross, and follows with an agricultural metaphor to illustrate the severity of such actions. Hebrews’ arguments are saturated with Israel’s Scriptures, and the idea of an agricultural metaphor is no stranger to someone with that kind of familiarity. God, through his prophets, frequently presents Israel as a type of land in the Hebrew Bible, using metaphors (often poetic) to describe the destruction that they are soon to face, typically for disobeying his covenant commands. The seriousness of their actions, and the seriousness of crucifying again the Messiah, is not lost on the author here, and so he draws upon similar metaphors used by the prophets of old to depict judgement in consumptive, not tormentative, terms. Turning to the prophet Isaiah for an example, we find a poignant metaphor for God’s people as a vineyard, planted to produce good grapes, but comes to bear a bad harvest. Unsurprisingly, the judgement language, just as it is in Hebrews 6:8, is explicit in its outcome: that which God burns is reduced to dust. Expanding on the judgement that God will bring upon the “land” (representing his people in this metaphor), he says, “I will remove its hedge, and it shall be devoured … Therefore, as the tongue of fire devours the stubble, and as dry grass sinks down in the flame, so their root will become rotten, and their blossom go up like dust” (Is. 5:5, 24).

   Another closely related covenant-curse text is Deuteronomy 29, in which Moses is prompted by God to address the people, and speaking of the punishment of the land, he says, “all its soil burned out by sulphur and salt, nothing planted, nothing sprouting, unable to support any vegetation, like the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, Admah and Zeboiim, which the LORD destroyed in his fierce anger … bringing on it every curse written in this book.” (Deut. 29:23, 27). There are strong parallels between both the cause and the wording of the judgement in these passages. The antecedent of the judgement found here is remarkably similar to that of Hebrews 6:4-8: the people abandoned the covenant through which they were set free, the Israelites of old from that which brought them out of bondage to Egypt, and the readers of the first century from that which brought them out of bondage to sin^[5]. Likewise, the wording of the judgement in both instances share particularly in “cursing” and “burning”. Moses’ own example of the infamous Sodom and Gomorrah in the passage cannot help but point to an image of terminal judgement, invoking remembrance of cities that were reduced to dust under the wrath of God. Against this covenant-curse backdrop, Hebrews’ warning to the apostate is better informed, and framed in the same consumptive terms of judgement; land that is unfruitful is “near to being cursed,” and “its end is burning” (Heb. 6:7-8) (cf. Is. 9:18-19, Lev. 26:32-33, Mal. 4:1). This metaphorical connection would have likely been an obvious connection for the original audience to make, given their familiarity with the Hebrew Bible.

Once For All Atonement

“He entered once for all into the Holy Place, not with the blood of goats and calves, but with his own blood, thus obtaining eternal redemption … Nor was it to offer himself again and again, as the high priest enters the Holy Place year after year with blood that is not his own; for then he would have had to suffer again and again since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the age to remove sin by the sacrifice of himself.” Hebrews 9:12, 25-26

   Hebrews frames Christ’s sacrifice by contrast with repeated Levitical offerings. Rather than have to make atonement for our sins every year, as an imperfect high priest would, Hebrews shows the typological fulfillment of that role by Christ. The author is working to establish a sense of finality in the minds of the reader, a logic which is persistent throughout the epistle. This pattern of finality sits uneasily within a model of eternal torment, where the punitive response is unending by definition. One could reasonably argue that eternal life and eternal punishment do not have to be symmetrical, but it would require a diverging from the established logic of the author. He is stacking the language of repetition (pre-incarnation) against the language of finality (post-incarnation).

   In reinforcing the logic of complete finality, the author uses the example of covenant ratification. Death itself was required to inaugurate a new covenant. Hebrews 9:15-18 states, “For this reason he is the mediator of a new covenant … because a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions under the first covenant. Where a will is involved, the death of the one who made it must be established. For a will takes effect only at death … Hence not even the first covenant was inaugurated without blood.” The broader sentence also situates this death within the promise of inheritance, but the present point is the author’s insistence that covenant enactment is tied to death. The logic of the author depends on the irreversible finality of death for the analogy to work. A covenant is established only through a decisive event, not an ongoing process. While this does not specifically cover final judgement, it does give us more insight into Hebrews’ categories of thought: those of finality and decisiveness. Reinforcing the idea of finality in early Christian thought, Melito of Sardis in his influential work that expounds upon early Christian understanding of the Paschal mystery, says, “Humanity was doled out by death, for a strange disaster and captivity surrounded him; he was dragged off a captive under the shadow of death, and the father’s image was left desolate. For this reason in the body of the Lord is the paschal mystery completed.”^[6] The emphasis here, as it is in the rest of the work, is on the absolute finality of everything Jesus did, including taking our place under the wrath of God and receiving death as the due penalty. That is the consistent witness of Christian understanding of the atonement; the death of Christ is our looking glass through which we can comprehend God’s wrath. This logic of decisive enactment will matter when Hebrews later describes judgement not as an administered process but as an “end” that consumes.

Consuming Fire and the Fate of God’s Adversaries

“For if we wilfully persist in sin after having received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a fearful prospect of judgement, and a fury of fire that will consume the adversaries.” Hebrews 10:26-27

“Moreover, we had human parents to discipline us, and we respected them. Should we not be even more willing to be subject to the Father of spirits and live? For indeed our God is a consuming fire.” Hebrews 12:9, 29

   Perhaps the strongest of all judgement language found in Hebrews lies in its later chapters. Here the epistle’s earlier logic of finality turns into explicit warning: the repudiation of Christ leaves no further sacrifice, only the expectation of judgement described in terms of fire that consumes. This is the culmination of the logic that the author has been presenting. What remains for those who are considered adversaries of Christ is no alternative sacrifice, only consumption by means of a fury of fire. The force of this passage is clear, and for any model of final punishment outside of conditionalism, it would require qualification not found in the text. Let us then look to John Calvin, in his commentary on verse 27, where he says, “It shall so devour them as to destroy, but not to consume them; for it will be inextinguishable.”^[7] He qualifies the imagery by trying to distinguish consumption and destruction. A fury of fire that devours as to destroy, but not consume, is not the natural reading of the text, and this reading depends on proceeding as though “devour” and “consume” do not share a common meaning of reducing to nothing that which is being burned. This reading requires consume to mean something other than terminal consumption (cf. Jam. 5:3).

   Hebrews 12 supplies a theological capstone to the warning of 10:26–27: what is at stake is life, and refusal of God’s speech leaves not an alternative remedy but the consuming holiness of God. This language of terminal judgement, rather than a never-ending punitive process, once again is retained even by traditionalist interpreters. John Chrysostom, father of the church and major early exegete, in his exposition on the fire of God in 10:27 says, “For as a wild beast when irritated and very fierce and savage, would not rest till it could lay hold on some one and eat him up; so also that fire, like one goaded by indignation, whatever it can lay hold of does not let go, but devours and tears it to pieces.”^[8] Chrysostom, in his homiletical explanation, uses a metaphor to explain God’s consuming holiness that contains the same devouring force as the original passage. This affirms how naturally Hebrews’ judgement language is heard: the fire of God does not merely afflict, but it devours. The logic of finality presented throughout the epistle is crowned here at the end of his warning section. God, in his holiness, is a consuming fire, and the epistle’s warning is cast in terms of decisive consumption rather than ongoing administration. Thus the epistle’s culminating warning: life on the one hand, consuming fire on the other, renders eternal conscious torment difficult to reconcile with Hebrews’ own categories.

Conclusion

   The epistle to the Hebrews does not treat final judgement as an abstract doctrine separate from Christ or as an accessory to its pastoral rhythm; rather, it uses Christ to frame judgement within his once for all work. As the sacrifices for sin can no longer be ongoing or repeatable, the warnings are definitive: those who repudiate the Son have no sacrifice for sin, and face a devouring, consuming fire. Read Christologically, one cannot avoid the author’s logic of finality in everything that has been accomplished by Jesus. The description of God as a consuming fire draws together the categories of decisiveness and finality that are unable to fit into a model of final punishment that would demand ongoing life within a punitive process. Even interpreters committed to eternal torment often find themselves using Hebrews’ consumptive idiom when issuing pastoral warning, as F. B. Meyer memorably illustrates:

“O disobedient soul, who hast read these words thus far, stop and bethink thee of thy danger! Beware lest thou be as the chaff or thorns, which are burned up with unquenchable fire, on the part of the Lord himself. Be quick to turn to him and live.”^[9]

Bibliography

A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. Edited by Frederick William Danker. 3rd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000.

John Calvin. Calvin’s Commentary on the Bible: Hebrews 10. https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/cal/hebrews-10.html.

John Chrysostom. Homilies on the Epistle to the Hebrews. Translated by Frederic Gardiner. In Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series, vol. 14, edited by Philip Schaff. Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1889. https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/240220.htm.

Melito of Sardis. On Pascha: With the Fragments of Melito and Other Material Related to the Quartodecimans. Translated, introduced, and annotated by Alistair Stewart-Sykes. Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2001. PDF.

F. B. Meyer. The Way into the Holiest: Expositions of the Epistle to the Hebrews. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1951. PDF hosted by Christian Classics Ethereal Library.